December 1, 2020

Wash Your Ears Out with This

By Chaplain Mike

I just started reading Eric Metaxas’ acclaimed new biography, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy. I’m anxious to share it with you soon.

In the meantime, and especially in the light of last evening’s post about “Pastor Ted,” wash your ears out, regain your bearings, and stimulate your spirit with a few of Bonhoeffer’s words from The Cost of Discipleship:

Cheap grace is the deadly enemy of our Church. We are fighting today for costly grace.

Cheap grace means grace sold on the market like cheapjacks’ wares. The sacraments, the forgiveness of sin, and the consolations of religion are thrown away at cut prices. Grace is represented as the Church’s inexhaustible treasury, from which she showers blessings with generous hands, without asking questions or fixing limits. Grace without price; grace without cost! The essence of grace, we suppose, is that the account has been paid in advance, and, because it has been paid, everything can be had for nothing. Since the cost was infinite, the possibilities of using it and spending it are infinite. What would grace be if it were not cheap?

…Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves.

Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

The Cost of Discipleship, pp. 45-47

Hear the words of a real pastor. A man who knew what it meant to live in a dangerous world of temptation and testing. Who embraced costly grace and paid the price. Who proclaimed a theology of the cross, not a theology of glory. Who stood against evil. Who took mercy on the poor, outcast, and oppressed, and who rescued the persecuted. Who rejected the superficial and wholeheartedly pursued a rigorous discipleship of mind, soul, and body. Who called his brothers and sisters to follow Jesus and die.

Now that’s a minister I would listen to.

And I wouldn’t need a media company to recruit me and pay my plane ticket to be there at his church’s first service.


  1. I’m halfway through with this book and I highly recommend it. Not just a great story of sacrificial Christian love but also a picture of WWI/WWII German history from within.

  2. Steve Newell says

    I do have issues with calling Bonhoeffer a martyr since he didn’t die for the Faith but he died for attempting to kill Hitler. Had Bonhoeffer been killed for training pastors in the Christian faith or for proclaiming Law and Gospel against the evils of the Nazis, then he would be a martyr.

    I have found the his book :”The Cost of Discipleship” is one of the most important Christian books of the 20th Century.

    • Steve when did Bonhoeffer try to kill Hitler. He served in the same military wing that the Valkyrie conspirators served in and, yes, was under a death sentenced just for being a member of the wrong group since Hitler had ordered all who had ever been a part of if be executed just to make sure no one who may of conspired against him went without being found. My understanding is that Bonhoeffer was jailed because of his out spoken criticism of the government’s interference in the church and those among the clergy who sold out to Hitler and his minions. As such, he was a martyr for his faith.

      • Bonhoeffer was a member of the Abwher, which was an anti-Hilter group and he advocated for Hitler’s assassination. He was a double agent working with the Allies during this time.

        • I think the issue is, to whom could it be said he was the traitor.

        • Confusion reigns. The Abwehr was the German government’s counterespionage unit, not a group of dissidents.

          • This is true. And Bonhoeffer was not in the Abwehr and never took the Hitler oath. It hasn’t been that long, but WW2 is a case where history becomes myth and myth becomes history.

    • The only thing I would say, Steve, is that Bonhoeffer ultimately acted out of what he thought to be his Christian duty in trying to dispose of Hitler. He opposed the maniac not from a political or military stance, but from a religious one. In that sense, he acted and died for his faith.

      • I am very careful in whom I would apply the title “Martyr” to.

      • Bonhoeffer is not my favorite theologian. He had some great things to say here and there, and I find his book “Life Together” to be much better than “The Cost of Discipleship”.
        I will grant that he acted out of faith. So did many soldiers who died on the shores of Normandy. If your looking for a martyr, there are others. Kai Munk comes to mind. He was shot for his faith.

        • Life Together is not a bad book, but the whole modern worship wars could be escalated by Bonhoeffer’s insistence in Life Together that every Christian must learn to sing properly.

    • So trying to kill Hitler was a bad thing?

      • not what steve said.

      • Murder is a sin. Hitler is evil. In our fallen world, we are forced to sin to prevent a greater evil. All we can do is confess our sin and rely on God’s mercy in Christ..

        • Jonathan Blake says

          That’s exactly what he did from a quote of his I remember reading. He said that he did not ask for God’s blessing for what he was about to do (attempt to assassinate Hitler) b/c He knew it was wrong to murder but he only sought God’s forgiveness for it. He had come to the end of himself over how to resist Hitler and could see no other way to end the great evil that was going on. I’ll try to find the quote if it really matters but I remember reading this repentant attitude toward the actions he was going to undertake.

        • You can’t repent of something you haven’t done yet. And there is NEVER a situation in which one is forced to sin.

          The very essence of martyrdom is refusal to turn from God even at the cost of one’s life.

  3. And his life conformed to his words, too. I think I’ll listen to this one.

    • And his life conformed to his words, too

      oh my, if christians can have a mantra, I’m making this mine….

      thanks Damaris

  4. Clay Knick says

    This book will be my “Book of the Year” for 2010. Yes, know it is only June and something else may cross my path (“Hannah’s Child” comes close), but I loved this book. It will stay with me for a long, long time. Could not put it down.

    • This is one of my desert island books. Along with Life Together. Bonhoeffer to me is like a car wreck. It is awful in its reality, but I can’t turn my head away. His writing goes to my heart and peels away the layers like an onion to expose my indifference and convict me of the complacent superficiality of my faith.

  5. The grace He speaks of sounds more Roman than Luther.

    • Bonhoeffer was speaking out against the presumption that merely attending church and calling myself a Christian (nominalism) meant that I had experienced the grace of God. He was fighting a different battle than Luther. If you go on to read more in the first chapter of The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer brings Luther into the discussion and shows the compatibility of their theologies of grace.

      • I can remember reading his take years ago and if I recall his views hardly reflected Imonk or Luther’s views of grace. From the sounds of it He is declaring grace is nothing less than interior resurrection, a radical transformation of life from within as well as without. That is not the law verses gospel message I often here amongst devout Lutheran friends, I have even felt Imonk stand firmly with Luther on this issue. I may have it all wrong but it seems that Bonhoeffer often was challenging this very doctrine.

        • I agree, Steve, Bonhoeffer’s writings have been in the top 5 of those who have influenced by life in the faith and IMO, I see his writings reflecting theologies of cross and glory being lived out in every arena of our life. I believe they can be held and lived together thru the wisdom and power of the Spirit and the Word.

        • Context is everything, Steve. There are ways of talking about grace that sound like absolute license. And there are ways that sound like a message of total obligation. Both can be entirely proper depending on the situation being addressed. Jesus did this. So did Paul. So did Luther. If they hadn’t there wouldn’t be so much debate about law and grace!

          • Maybe what it really shows is that Catholics and Lutherans aren’t really as far apart on the issue of grace as they think they are.

          • Point taken. I certrainly am not a authority on Bonhoeffer but Imonk has preached a mighty loud message or two about radical in your face unconditional freedom in Christ alone, by faith alone, period. Do you think Imonk would be attracted to the post or repeled by the overtones it demands?

            • Steve, I hesitate to speak for MS but I know he believed in discipleship as well as in free grace, and would be as critical of nominalism as he would be of legalism. He just fought against a lot more of the latter.

            • Steve, let me say one more thing. I would not like how Bonhoeffer says things if I read them in a systematic theology textbook. In that context, they would be subject to too much misunderstanding. I hear what you are saying, and had the same reservations when first reading DB. Like I said before, context is everything.

      • Ben Meyer says

        Bonhoeffer was joining Luther in fighting against the “ex opere operato” view of Christianity. That is, he was fighting against the view that merely by showing up and coming up for communion, you are a Christian. Luther didn’t believe this either as evidenced by the Small Catechism in which he connects the benefits of the sacraments to faith.

        I think that Luther emphasized the grace aspect because the focus of the church at the time was on works (and in certain quarters good works is still over emphasized today) and Bonhoeffer was emphasizing living out the Christian faith because that was being neglected at the time (and in certain quarters is still neglected today).

        Bonhoeffer was reacting to the idea that you can sin as much as you want, basically disregard Jesus call to holiness, and still be fine and dandy with God.

      • “If you go on to read more in the first chapter of The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer brings Luther into the discussion and shows the compatibility of their theologies of grace.”
        Yeah…. And I thinketh he protesteth too much…..
        Sorry, but no matter how often I read Bonhoeffer on this I can’t help but to think the same as Steve above.
        I’m not saying that there isn’t an anti-nomian tendency in Lutheranism. But Grace must remain grace, and law law. Faith cannot be born of law, faith cannot be resuscitated by works. And if there is a problem in the twentieth and twenty first century church it is not “cheap grace” but the use of that term.

  6. Ted Haggard’s brand of religion offers a glaring example of this, but had you ever considered doing a future post, Chap Mike on how ev. ministry seems to be “testimony driven”, and I don’t mean so much a testimony of Jesus and His ressurection , unless it’s used as a “spice” to tell us about resurrection POWER….and then on goes the testimony of how God impacted OUR lives….blah, blah,blah…… Maybe this is a revivalist holdover, I don’t know, but I was thinking as I drove in today that there is a very thin line we cross when telling our story between GOD getting the glory and spotlight, and our own selves getting the glory and spotlight. Our celebrity culture, of course, makes this a petrie dish for this way of thinking.

    Just wondering.

    • Good thoughts. I’ll consider that.

    • (I hope I don’t offend anyone in saying this, but) My husband coined the term “Christian pornography.” He meant the salacious testimonies that spend 55 minutes on the gory details of a life of sin and 5 minutes on salvation. I’ve seen videos of some of these talks (sent to me by well-meaning evangelicals) and was appalled by the avid interest on the faces of the little old ladies in the congregation, I now avoid these as a stumbling block and snare.

      • Good points, and I’d say that in addition to the salacious element, there is just the pure energy and quantity of effort in talking about US versus talking about the savior of our souls. Who would the mythical fair minded observer judge to be main character to our stories ? Who is the bit player ??

      • Cynthia Jones says

        Good point. People “lap up” these types of testimonies, though. No one wants to hear about how God helped a person navigate the waters of the teen years WITHOUT getting into drugs, alcohol, sex, etc… It’s not a “profound enough” testimony. There is no “shock factor.” Someone who never got into all the “heavy stuff” couldn’t POSSIBLY relate to a room full of teenagers who are struggling with such things! Never mind that such a person just MIGHT be a good example and that s/he just MIGHT be able to help someone understand how reliance on God can PREVENT you from going down that path, just the same as finding God later can bring you OUT of that life!

    • TJ Wallin says

      Great post by Chaplain Mike on an outstanding book by Bonhoeffer. I was blessed by this post. I first read the Cost of Discipleship over 20 years ago when I was new to the faith and my now dog-eared copy is never far from my stack of “in process” reading.

      You’ll have to execuse me for scolding those folks on this board that take inspiration from this wonderful book to bash the evangelicals –but I just can’t let it go: Your words illuminate the depths of your self-absorbtion and they are really really boring. There I said it. Father forgive me…

  7. You should sell books on the side , Chap Mike, this one is now on my “must find” list, and I might even pony up and pay full retail for it. Great plug.

    GO ROYALS……..
    Greg R

    • I got it at Borders with a 33% off coupon, and Amazon’s price is even better. It’s in my confession of faith: I believe in never paying full price.

    • David Cornwell says

      Very good price on digital editions from B&N & Amazon also, but if I keep spending money on books at the present rate, I’ll be coming out of retirement soon!

  8. MelissaTheRagamuffin says

    I couldn’t find it on B&N in digital format. I was about to post that anyone who has a Nook but still wants to read it there is a program called Calibre which will change the format of any e-book to fit whichever gadget you have. There was a book about C.S. Lewis I did that with. Worked great.

    • MelissaTheRagamuffin says

      Never mind. I had to actually get on on my computer. It won’t come up using the shop/search option in Nook. Grrrrrrrr…..

  9. It’s been many years since I’ve read “Cost…” I do respect Bonhoeffer, but without reading the context, I do cringe a bit at this quote. He’s right that grace isn’t cheap; grace is always free. Unless you get to the point Paul did when he asks, “should we sin more, that grace should increase?” we haven’t discovered true grace.

    The grace that Luther preached so hard even had a hard time in the evangelical (Lutheran) church, such as when the pietistic movement broke out (my grandfather was a pietistic Lutheran). This is what Luther meant when he said in the intro to his commentary on Galatians that our greatest fear is that the church fall back into legalism. Adding anything – even good intentions – to grace destroys the Gospel.

    • I found the key line in the Bonhoeffer quote to be: “Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves.” It’s not really a deficient view of God’s grace that DB is describing, it is an overinflated belief that we are looking to Christ when we are actually satisfied with ourselves as we are.

    • “Grace is always free”. Well said friend, I will remember that. Man just doesn’t seem content with getting something for nothing.

    • It’s been many years since I’ve read “Cost…” I do respect Bonhoeffer, but without reading the context, I do cringe a bit at this quote. He’s right that grace isn’t cheap; grace is always free. Unless you get to the point Paul did when he asks, “should we sin more, that grace should increase?” we haven’t discovered true grace.

      The grace that Luther preached so hard even had a hard time in the evangelical (Lutheran) church, such as when the pietistic movement broke out (my grandfather was a pietistic Lutheran). This is what Luther meant when he said in the intro to his commentary on Galatians that our greatest fear is that the church fall back into legalism. Adding anything – even good intentions – to grace destroys the Gospel.

      Alden, I’m rather new here and don’t know the rules exactly, but I think that “grace is free” as you employ it here is a platitude that depends on not actually living as a Christian, which is an activity that Jesus spoke of as both a choice and a grace, as well as something that costs everything, and something where intention counts a great deal.

      I make the suggestion respectfully.

  10. Chaplain Mike,

    Thanks for this quote from Bonhoeffer. I’m actually working my way through The Cost of Discipleship right now.
    Some here have said that Bonhoeffer’s statement on grace seems to be not very, well, gracious. You pointed out that context is key, and I would agree. I would add, too, that the context we must look for in statements on grace that sound like either licentiousness or obligation is not merely what the author says before and after the quoted statement, but what the pastoral context is. To whom is the statement addressed? I think that if Bonhoeffer was addressing someone who was crushed under guilt and the weight of sin, he would have sounded like Luther. In this pastoral context, he was addressing (as you pointed out) those who were nominal Christians, who used “grace” as an excuse to live without any attempt at holiness and still be in favor with God, and thus would be speaking in more obligatory terms.

    I’m far from saying that the Roman and Protestant views of salvation are really “the same thing” when you get deep down, but I think there is less difference between them than most people think, especially since Luther was more often writing about grace in the context of the guilt of sin, while his opponents were writing in the context of the need for a holy life.

    Pax Christi,


  11. I have had a huge problem with this “cheap grace” most of my life. I’m talking about a family who has a biological father capable of terrible abuse to his children, not once, not ten times, but years’ of abuse on every child. In my day there was no help. Police were told. Teachers, principals were told. Our pastor was told. Social workers knew. A judge granted me an extensive interview regarding the subject. NO ONE gave us any guidance. NO ONE showed up at our house to arrest him. If it were today, he would be in prison for the rest of his life. And I believe he was not capapble of rehab. That was all tried, to no avail.

    Now, this same man went to church with the family every week. He even WORKED at the church. He went to communion. Grace was being offered him. And then he went home, or wherever else he went and continued to do what he wanted to do. Abuse children and women. (The women were consenting though.)

    As a little child I prayed to God, with tears, to help me and my family. I asked for His intervention. I didn’t understand why He wouldn’t help me and us. As I grew older I began to wonder if I was “chosen” or “elected” by God? Did He really want me? Did I belong to Him as I was being taught? (I also attended a parochial school.) I didn’t know what God was thinking about my situation. But I still loved Him and believed in Him even though I wondered if He did care about me and my family.

    Recently, I have read a couple of articles about the lack of the use of church discipline. I have to heartily concur that this should have been exercised with my dad. If I were to write a book, I would call it “Extreme Freedom.” And I believe its true. People have the complete freedom to sin. And to sin as much or as badly as they want. I heard a pastor say that no matter what you are or have ever gone through, that God is right there with you. He suffers with you. After the story about the Flood, the Bible doesn’t seem to say much about God intervening to protect people from other people’s sin. Except that there will be judgment someday. And He will administer it. And I need to be mindful of my own sinfulness.

    There is much I don’t understand about forgiveness. Forgiving and forgetting. And cheap grace. I know that I don’t believe grace is cheap. Not to the Lord Jesus. And I don’t believe He gives it out cheaply either. With me, I struggle just to accept what I don’t know and understand. Just keep myself going to church and accepting God’s love given to me through the Sacraments and the Word.

    I love Dietrich Boenhoeffer. And I agree with him about cheap grace. It doesn’t work for anyone.

    • alvin_tsf says

      thank you so much for sharing your story. i think what you recounted shows most vividly what most people in this thread have been tryin to discuss.

      overwhelming grace should not lead to tyranny and abuse but to freedom to be and do what one should, in Jesus. i think, in essence, this is what Jesus shaped sprituality really is. a life shaped by Jesus resulting from the grace He gave through the cross and the empty tomb.

      thanks again. your remarks was worth more than all the theological tirades here. was very blessed!

  12. Been a while siince I read Bonhoeffer, but “Cost” is on my shelf because it’s a keeper. Always two sides to the grace is free versus grace is costly coin. So many paradoxes in the Christian faith, but the mystery of it is also so, so often the beauty of it. The best I can do to describe the venture is to say that grace is free but the transformation and love it engenders in us changes us into people who, however flawed, do the loving, sactificial and costly things.

  13. Christopher Lake says

    As for whether Bonhoeffer is truly “Lutheran” in his theology, Bonhoeffer strikes me as a theologian who is more concerned to speak as he understands the Bible to speak about grace and discipleship, rather than trying to always adhere to an idea of “historic Lutheran orthodoxy.”

    One interesting fact is that, historically, Luther’s theology contained certain elements which most modern-day Lutherans would reject, such as a strong veneration of Mary, and a seeming belief that one’s stances on infant baptism and the nature of the Eucharist (or Lord’s Supper) are *not* non-essentials (in terms of determining whether one is even a Christian or not).

  14. The theology that Bonhoeffer was opposing was not at all Lutheran. The history of the German state church is a sad state of affairs. Basically, after Germany became a republic, the separate regional churches – Lutheran, Reformed, and United Protestant – began to be forced together, ultimately resulting in the German Evangelical Church (Deutsche Evangelische Kirche, DEK) under Hitler.

    I don’t like his take on Luther’s “sin boldly”. He completely takes it out of context. It was not an antinomian declaration. Read Luther’s commentary on Galatians and tell me how he was antinomian. Perhaps Bonhoeffer was responding to those who used “sin boldly” as license.

    I do agree that a key message in the above quote regards the paragraph about bestowing grace upon ourselves; a grace which does not free us from the toils of sin.

    The nagging question that I have is how can grace be both costly (Bonhoeffer) and dangerous (Capon)? It seems like every effort to make grace costly results in it being locked up and fenced off, and only once in a while is it rationed out to the truly “deserving”. Many of the scenarios from Dr. Rosenbladt’s message for those hurt by the church probably can be traced back to failed efforts to make grace costly. The result is usually legalism and Finney-styled pelagianism. And Rosenbladt is absolutely correct: it is legalism (not grace) which leads to antinomianism, because legalism emboldens our sinfulness.

    • Ben Meyer says

      I agree that he rips the “sin boldly” statement out of context, guts it, and then re-interprets it to make an entirely different point.

      • Ben Meyer says

        Also, I think the idea of “costly grace” is probably a bad way of saying “unrepentance.”

        I think what Bonhoeffer really wants to attack is the idea of Christianity without repentance, which of course is exactly what is causing many problems in Christ’s church today.

        • Ben:

          I think “repentance” would need to be clarified. Some people assume repentance implies that “sinners” must clean up their acts before they can be saved. That’s why Bonhoeffer’s comment about the “toils of sin” is important. I really think people not only want forgiveness; they want deliverence from sin. Such deliverance will be incomplete and imperfect in this lifetime, but that shouldn’t stop us from hungering and thirsting for righteousness.

    • Does anyone know where to find the context of “sin boldly?”

  15. I do like your title for this post, Chaplain Mike: “Wash Your Ears Out with This.” Creative!

  16. every Lutheran sentence has 4 things – a noun, a verb, Law, & grace 😉

    If you Lutherans don’t want Bonhoeffer – we Anabaptist will take him:
    -he had a pacifist streak in him – he thought about seeing Ghandi b4 going back to his homeland.
    -His book “Life Together” sounds like a Hutterite handbook
    -He was Martyred – maybe he could be in a revised “martyrs Mirror”
    -& we dig the idea of “costly” grace (by we I mean me – can’t speak for the rest )

    do Lutherans ever feel like maybe you are trying to answer an irrational question with rational answers????? is it faith or works? Grace or Discipleship? Santifacation or Justification?
    Life is complicated !!!! it can’t just be put in an &/or box. I like CS Lewis’ answer were he said trying to figure out the need for Faith or works is like trying to figure out which blade of a sissors cuts the paper.

    I love Bonhoeffer – & David Hasselhoff 🙂

    • I also just read in his biography about how he was impressed with Count Zinzendorf in his youth and some elements of revivalist Christianity when he came to America. He had a pietistic streak, no doubt.

    • “Life is complicated !!!! it can’t just be put in an &/or box.”

      Good comment. This thought alone will probably keep me from ever being a full-blooded Lutheran, Calvinist, or any other adjective before the word “Christian.”

    • Luther used many dichotomies to define truth, but not in the way you mention. There is no conflict between justification or sanctification, grace or discipleship, et al.

      I can’t speak for all Lutherans, but for me Luther always points me back to the cross and the empty tomb. Christ is both my justification and sanctification. Discipleship without grace is self-righteousness. Faith without works is dead, but works not done out of faith in Christ’s finished work are sin.

      But Anabaptists have their message. It is interesting that at a time when everyone was condemning anabaptists, Erasmus commended them for living consistently with what they claimed to believe.

      • dumb ox: Luther is one thing. Lutherans another. The followers more often than not become more stringent in their definitions than the founder.

        • Saying “Luther is one thing, Lutherans another” reminds me of this good verse from Kipling:

          He that hath a Gospel
          To loose upon Mankind,
          Though he serve it utterly–
          Body, soul and mind–
          Though he go to Calvary
          Daily for its gain–
          It is His Disciple
          Shall make his labour vain.

          He that hath a Gospel
          For all earth to own–
          Though he etch it on the steel,
          Or carve it on the stone–
          Not to be misdoubted
          Through the after-days–
          It is His Disciple
          Shall read it many ways.

          It is His Disciple
          (Ere Those Bones are dust )
          Who shall change the Charter,
          Who shall split the Trust–
          Amplify distinctions,
          Rationalize the Claim;
          Preaching that the Master
          Would have done the same.

          It is His Disciple
          Who shall tell us how
          Much the Master would have scrapped
          Had he lived till now–
          What he would have modified
          Of what he said before.
          It is His Disciple
          Shall do this and more….

          He that hath a Gospel
          Whereby Heaven is won
          ( Carpenter, or cameleer,
          Or Maya’s dreaming son ),
          Many swords shell pierce Him,
          Mingling blood with gall;
          But His Own Disciple
          Shall wound Him worst of all!

      • I’ve enjoyed your comments — I’ve seen the movie “Hanged on a Twisted Cross” about the life of Bonhoeffer. An amazing man in an insane time in history. When you say “Luther always points me back to the cross and the empty tomb” – What more can be said Brother??
        This is the answer to our questions! God is Love , God is Glory! peace

  17. We need to keep in mind the conditions of the time, to some extent. The Nazified church continued to operate under the control of the totalitarian state. Pastors of Jewish descent were deposed from office. Who protested? Bonhoeffer spoke out about this from the beginning.

    His big nagging problem was: is it right or not right to try and get rid of a monster like Hitler, and after much soul searching he got involved actively. He decided that was what his conscience demanded, after all, and no matter even Ghandi.

    It was against his conscience to stand by. It was against his conscience to let the church operate the way it did: dishing out the sacraments and being complicit in the persecution of Jews and others.

    The National church dished out cheap grace to ITself, absolved itself without confessing its sin, etc.
    IT did not discipline itself.

    There are parallels to current organizations and to us as individuals: becoming unaccountable, being too afraid to confess Christ, where you’ve been put to do it, being unwilling to repent when needed, being unwilling to sacrifice for another.

    Luther would have just called all of that being “secure” in your sinning and needing a good dose of law applied. He would have never condoned any such things (leaving aside his insane tirade against the Jews.)

    Luther himself never had a “cheap” grace of the Nazi collaborator kind. He resisted Pope, Emperor, heretics, suffered excommunication, vilification etc. rather than giving up grace in Christ. His “free” grace was very “costly” to him.